7b 

88-B 

33251 


K 


®f)omas  (©atnafoorougf),  21. 
%  4H  m .  burner,  ft*  a. 


EXHIBITION  OF  PAINTINGS 

B  Y 

Sfjomas  #atn^oroug!),  2L 

AND 

f .  M.  m  burner,  E.  2T. 

FOR  THE  BENEFIT  OF  THE  ARTISTS’ 
FUND  AND  ARTISTS’  AID  SOCIETIES 


AT  THE 

GALLERIES  o/M.  KNOEDLER  &  CO. 
556-55S  Fifth  Avenue 


January  14th  to  31st  inclusive 
1914 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2018  with  funding  from 
Getty  Research  Institute 


https://archive.org/details/exhibitionofpainOOunse 


M.  KNOEDLER  &  CO.  BEG  TO  THANK 
THEIR  PATRONS  FOR  THEIR  GREAT  GEN¬ 
EROSITY  IN  MAKING  THE  LOAN  EXHIBI¬ 
TION  OF  PAINTINGS  BY  THE  TWO  GREAT 
ENGLISH  MASTERS,  TURNER  AND  GAINS¬ 
BOROUGH,  A  REPRESENTATIVE  ONE  COV¬ 
ERING  THE  DIFFERENT  PERIODS  OF 
THEIR  WORK. 

THE  PROCEEDS  OF  THE  EXHIBITION 
ARE  TO  BE  GIVEN  TO  THE  ARTISTS’  FUND 
AND  ARTISTS’  AID  SOCIETIES,  WHO  HAVE 
IN  COMMON  THE  OBJECT  OF  ASSISTING 
UNFORTUNATE  ARTISTS. 


THOMAS  GAINSBOROUGH,  R.  A.  (1727-1788) 

In  1727,  the  year  that  George  II  came  to  the  throne,  Thomas 
Gainsborough,  youngest  child  of  nine,  first  saw  the  light  in  a  well-to- 
do  tradesman’s  home  at  Sudbury,  in  Suffolk.  John  Gainsborough,  the 
father,  was  a  thrifty  man,  who  made  his  way  as  milliner  and  clothier, 
but  whose  chief  source  of  revenue  was  from  making  of  shrouds  for 
the  dead.  The  lad,  Thomas  Gainsborough,  went  to  the  grammar 
school  of  the  town,  his  mother’s  brother,  the  Rev.  Humphrey  Bur¬ 
roughs,  being  the  master.  By  ten  he  had  marked  skill  with  the 
pencil;  at  twelve  he  had  set  his  heart  on  being  a  painter,  and  was 
using  brushes  and  oil  paints.  He  left  school  at  fourteen.  Displaying 
a  precocious  instinct  for  landscape  and  pastels,  the  lad  was  happiest 
when  painting  from  Nature — a  holiday  ever  meant,  for  the  bright, 
mischievous  boy,  the  woods  by  Sudbury  and  his  paints  and  canvas 
with  him. 

The  father  saw  that  art  it  must  be  for  his  son;  so  after  a  family 
council  the  boy  of  fourteen  was  packed  off  on  the  coach  to  London 
to  board  with  a  silversmith,  Dupont  of  Wardour  Street,  who  sent  him 
to  Gravelot,  the  book  illustrator,  engraver  and  painter,  from  whom 
the  lad  undoubtedly  caught  the  hint  of  his  French  delicatesse  and  the 
marked  influence  of  Watteau.  Gravelot  generously  got  the  boy  into  the 
St.  Martin’s  Lane  Academy.  Thus  a  year  after  Reynolds  first  stepped 
into  London  as  ’prentice  to  Hudson,  the  coach  set  down  Gains¬ 
borough  in  her  cobbled  thoroughfares  and  the  eager  youth  and  as 
eager  boy  must  have  often  rubbed  elbows  in  their  walks  down  St. 
Martin’s  Lane.  Soon  after  Gainsborough  became  the  pupil  of  Hay- 
man,  the  historical  painter. 

Three  years  of  apprenticeship  saw  him  at  seventeen  start  artist  on 
his  own  account  at  lodgings  in  Hatton  Garden,  working  for  dealers, 
and  painting  landscapes  and  portraits  at  three  to  five  guineas.  He 
also  modeled  in  clay  but  found  small  demand  for  this  work.  He  was 
unsuccessful  the  first  year  and  returned  to  Suffolk  in  1745,  where  he 
was  soon  making  many  friends.  Up  with  the  lark  he  was  painting 
landscapes  until  set  of  sun,  painting  what  was  before  him  regardless 
of  the  laws  of  Italy.  He  painted  his  eldest  brother,  John  Gains¬ 
borough,  known  as  “Schemer  Jack,”  for  his  eternal  inventions,  one 
of  which  was  the  flying  machine  that  let  him  drop  into  a  ditch  from 
the  roof  of  a  house.  Gainsborough’s  sister,  Sarah,  became  Mrs.  Du¬ 
pont  and  mother  of  Gainsborough  Dupont,  an  artist  of  considerable 
gifts,  who  helped  his  uncle  later  with  the  draperies  of  his  lesser  por¬ 
traits. 

Gainsborough  met  at  nineteen  the  beautiful  girl,  Margaret  Burr, 
who  sitting  to  Gainsborough  ended  the  sittings  as  the  bride  of  the 
young  painter.  So,  at  nineteen,  Gainsborough  was  married  to  the 
eighteen-year-old  beauty,  entering  thus  early  on  that  happy  family  life 
that  knew  few  shadows.  It  was  a  fortunate  affair  for  the  young  fel¬ 
low:  the  bride  brought  him  £200  a  year 

Thus  in  1745  a  married  man  at  nineteen,  Gainsborough  took  a 
small  house  in  Sudbury  for  a  few  months,  painting  woodland  pieces; 
six  months  thereafter  the  young  couple  moved  to  Ipswich,  where  he 
remained  thirteen  years.  He  there  met  Phillip  Thicknesse,  a  soldier, 
who  was  a  quarrelsome,  huffy,  busybody  of  a  man,  but  who  had  a  real 
affection  for  the  artist  and  realized  the  genius  of  the  man,  and  he 

4 


brought  many  sitters  to  Gainsborough’s  studio  and  the  artist  was 
soon  a  welcome  guest  in  many  of  the  houses  of  the  great. 

The  year  1760  that  saw  Reynolds  move  into  his  house  in  Leicester 
Square  was  also  an  eventful  one  for  Gainsborough  in  Suffolk ;  he  made 
his  move  towards  fortune.  The  fame  of  Reynolds  came  to  him  and 
stirred  him  to  be  up  and  doing.  At  Thiclcnesse’s  prompting  he  packed 
up  and  made  for  the  fashionable  town  of  Bath,  espying  sitters  in 
plenty  among  the  beaux  and  belles  who  flocked  to  the  gayeties  of  the 
inland  watering  place.  The  news  of  his  coming  quickly  got  about  and 
his  studio  was  besieged  by  celebrities  of  the  day.  His  fee  of  five 
guineas  for  a  head  he  was  early  able  to  raise,  and  to  ask  forty  guineas 
for  a  half-length  and  one  hundred  for  a  full-length.  His  thirteen  happy 
years  at  Bath  were  to  thrust  forward  his  art  in  rapid  fashion.  Here 
he  fell  under  the  glamour  of  Van  Dyke  and  the  Flemings,  his  color 
developed  and  his  handling  became  broader.  And  he  made  copies  of 
Van  Dyck,  Velasquez,  Rembrandt,  Titian  and  others — above  all,  of 
Dutch  landscapes.  Here  he  painted  the  musicians,  the  actors,  the 
Stratford-on-Avon  Garrick,  Mrs.  Siddons,  Perdita  Robinson,  and  the 
galaxy. 

By  the  time  that  the  Royal  Academy  was  founded  in  1768,  Gains¬ 
borough’s  reputation  was  so  considerable  and  assured  that  his  was  one 
of  the  thirty-four  names  enrolled  in  its  original  membership,  and  he 
became  a  regular  exhibitor  at  the  Academy.  His  fame  and  talent  were 
increasing  steadily  at  Bath,  and  in  1770  he  painted  and  sent  to  Lon¬ 
don  to  the  Royal  Academy  one  of  the  most  famous  pictures  of  boy¬ 
hood  known  to  us,  “Master  Buttall,”  known  the  wide  world  over  as 
“The  Blue  Boy,”  which  is  now  owned  by  the  Duke  of  Westminster. 

In  1774  the  thought  of  coming  up  to  London  seems  to  have 
dawned  upon  him,  especially  as  Thicknesse  strutting  about  as  the  dis¬ 
coverer  of  Gainsborough  seems  to  have  annoyed  him  and  he  became 
involved  in  a  dispute  as  to  the  painting  of  a  portrait  of  Thicknesse  in 
exchange  for  a  certain  bass  viol  belonging  to  Mrs.  Thicknesse,  and 
which  ended  in  his  destroying  the  portrait  and  returning  the  viol.  So 
with  a  sigh  of  relief  he  packed  his  belongings  and  straightway  made 
for  London  in  the  Summer  of  1774.  His  success  was  immediate  and 
great.  He  took  the  western  wing  of  Schomberg  House  in  Pall  Mall, 
better  known  to  us  nowadays  as  the  War  Office,  having  for  neighbor 
in  the  other  wing  the  famous  quack.  Dr.  Graham,  to  whom  Society 
flocked,  to  be  ushered  by  liveried  servants  into  a  room  where  a  beauti¬ 
ful  girl  lay  up  to  the  neck  in  the  earth  or  mud  bath  that  brought, 
health.  By  paying  extra,  the  bloods  could  see  her  after  the  bath  had 
made  her  beautiful.  That  girl  was  Emma  Lyon,  afterwards  Lady 
Hamilton  and  Nelson’s  charmer.  The  Musidora  at  the  National  Gal¬ 
lery  was  probably  painted  by  Gainsborough  from  her  during  these 
days. 

Reynolds,  whether  he  felt  the  danger  of  rivalry  or  not,  concealed 
it  if  he  felt  it,  and  with  his  habitual  courtesy  called  upon  Gainsborough. 
The  call  was  not  returned;  and  Gainsborough  showed  the  same  lack 
of  tact  and  good  feeling  in  absenting  himself  from  the  Academy  meet¬ 
ings  and  dinners,  and  for  several  years  after  coming  to  London,  sent 
no  pictures  to  the  annual  display.  Yet  the  two  artists’  admiration  for 
each  other  was  prodigious  and  neither  was  backward  in  his  acknowl¬ 
edgement  of  it. 


5 


Gainsborough’s  triumphs  leaped  to  him  on  his  coming  to  town.  A 
few  months  in  Pall  Mall,  and  the  King  commanded  him  to  Buckingham 
Palace,  where  he  was  soon  painting  the  King  and  Royal  Family. 

Whatever  had  been  the  cause  of  Gainsborough’s  coolness  to  the 
Academy,  he  returned  in  1777  and  he  sent  several  important  pictures 
to  the  exhibition. .  The  Duchess  of  Devonshire,  owned  by  the  late 
Mr.  J.  Pierpont  Morgan,  was  painted  the  following  year.  In  1783 
Gainsborough  sent  to  the  Royal  Academy  26  canvases,  15  of  which 
were  portraits  of  the  Royal  Family.  It  also  included  the  superb 
Rothschild  “Mrs.  Sheridan”  seated  in  a  landscape.  The  Royal  Acad¬ 
emy  was  never  again  to  display  a  picture  by  Gainsborough  while  he 
lived.  The  following  year  of  1784  he  sent  his  great  group  of  George 
the  Third’s  Daughters  and,  knowing  that  much  of  its  charm  depended 
upon  its  delicacy  and  subtleties  of  tone  and  of  handling,  he  begged 
that  it  should  be  made  an  exception  to  the  rule  whereby  no  full-length 
portrait  is  allowed  upon  the  line,  agreeing  to  have  his  other  pictures 
placed  in  inferior  places.  The  Council  refused  the  request  and  Gains¬ 
borough  wrote  them  the  following  letter: 

“Mr.  Gainsborough  presents  his  compliments  to  the  gentlemen  ap¬ 
pointed  to  hang  the  pictures  in  the  Royal  Academy;  and  begs  leave 
to  HINT  to  them  that  if  The  Royal  Family,  which  he  has  sent  for 
this  Exhibition  (being  smaller  than  three-quarters),  are  hung  above 
the  line  along  with  full  lengths,  he  never  more,  whilst  he  breathes, 
will  send  another  picture  to  the  Exhibition. 

Saturday  Morn.  Which  he  swears  by  God.” 

From  this  breach  until  his  death  was  to  be  a  short  span  of  four 
years.  It  was  at  this  time  that  he  painted  the  celebrated  “Mrs. 
Siddons”  at  the  National  Gallery  and  in  which  he  made  his  famous, 
witty  remark  of  impatience  at  not  getting  the  features  exactly  to  his 
liking;  “Damn  your  nose,  madame,  there’s  no  end  to  it!” 

In  1788  while  seated  near  an  open  window  at  the  trial  of  Rey¬ 
nolds’  friend,  Warren  Hastings,  he  was  taken  ill  and  complained  of 
pain  to  his  wife  and  niece,  and  it  turned  out  to  be  cancer.  Survey¬ 
ing  his  career  as  he  lay  dying  he  decided  that  he  had  not  acted 
generously  toward  his  great  rival.  He  wrote  to  Sir  Joshua,  begging 
him  to  come  to  him  and  bid  good-bye.  It  is  pleasant  to  read  of  the 
reconciliation  of  the  two  men;  all  past  envies  and  humiliations  blotted 
out.  By  Gainsborough  the  sense  of  the  coming  end  to  his  art  was 
far  more  keenly  felt  than  the  ending  of  his  life;  but  as  Reynolds 
rose  to  leave  him,  Gainsborough  added  smiling:  “We  will  all  meet 
in  Heaven,  and  Van  Dyck  will  be  of  the  company.”  Gainsborough 
died  on  the  2nd  of  August,  1788,  a  few  days  after  Sir  Joshua  left  him. 
Reynolds  was  one  of  the  pall-bearers  as  they  bore  the  dead  man  to  the 
churchyard  at  Kew,  where  his  wife’s  body  was  laid  ten  years  after¬ 
wards. 

Gainsborough,  from  the  lack  of  the  Italian  journey,  uttered  a  more 
purely  native  song.  Steeped  as  he  was  in  admiration  of  Van  Dyck, 
he  owed  even  more  of  his  training  to  the  love  of  Nature  as  voiced 
by  the  Flemish  landscape-painters;  and  in  his  portraiture  his  debt 
to  the  genius  of  France  was  as  heavy  almost  as  to  Van  Dyck. 

Generous,  quick  to  anger,  as  eager  to  make  it  up  again,  spend¬ 
thrift,  careless,  pouring  out  money  to  his  poor  relations,  with  a 
ready  hand  in  his  pocket  at  every  tale  of  distress,  he  stands  out  a 
lovable  man.  His  love  of  music  was  an  obsession;  when  he  heard 

6 


a  finely  rendered  work,  he  would  pour  out  money  to  buy  the  instru¬ 
ment,  which  he  never  mastered.  He  would  give  away  a  masterpiece 
for  a  good  song. 

Of  the  many  whimsical  stories  told  of  his  extravagant  and  dogged 
insistence  in  buying  the  musical  instrument  from  a  player  on  hearing 
it  well  played,  one  of  the  drollest  is  that  of  his  affair  with  Bach. 
The  two  men  had  much  in  common— dry  humour,  affectionate  disposi¬ 
tion,  a  free  tongue,  and  the  genial  readiness  to  take  chaff  as  well  as 
to  sow  it.  Bach,  who  would  ironically  pretend  to  be  overwhelmed 
with  Gainsborough’s  musical  genius,  to  Gainsborough’s  huge  amuse¬ 
ment,  one  day  found  him  rending  the  air,  his  cheeks  blown  out,  with 
bloodcurdling  efforts  upon  the  bassoon.  “Pote  it  avay,  man,”  cried 
the  suffering  Bach,  “pote  it  avay;  do  you  want  to  burst  yourself? 
De  defil !  .  .  Py  all  the  powers  above,  as  I  hope  to  be  saved,  it 
is  just  for  all  the  vorld  as  the  veritable  praying  of  a  jackass.” 
“Damn  it!”  said  Gainsborough,  “why,  you  have  no  ear- — no  more 
than  an  adder!” 

Beginning  by  minute  observations  in  landscape,  he  gradually  grew 
to  utter  the  general  impression  swiftly,  with  broad,  deft  balance,  un¬ 
til,  as  at  a  wizard  stroke,  he  caught  the  mood  of  a  still  evening  or 
the  like,  and  wrought  it  in  romantic  fashion  upon  the  canvas.  His 
sense  of  colour  was  exquisite.  He  was  the  first  English  painter  to 
discover  England.  His  judgment  in  placing  figures  in  landscape  was 
astoundingly  right.  To  portraiture  he  brought  an  exquisite  subtlety 
difficult  to  define,  as  his  touch  is  difficult  to  describe.  He  paints  at 
times  with  the  paint  as  though  he  drew  in  colour;  and  that  he 
secured  thereby  the  marvellous  range  of  pearly  greys,  tender  lilacs, 
and  wondrous  bloom  is  a  marvel.  He  was  the  painter  of  feminine 
loveliness,  but  for  all  the  loveliness  he  states  the  character  of  the 
sitter  first  of  all.  He  loved  Van  Dyck,  and  some  of  his  chief  suc¬ 
cesses  with  boys’  portraits  were  when  he  set  them  in  Van  Dyck 
dress.  His  art  was  personal;  it  grew  out  of  his  own  intention. 
Moody  and  impressionable,  his  art  depended  greatly  on  his  interest  in 
his  sitter.  His  method  was  to  set  his  canvas  and  himself  at  right 
angles  to  his  sitter ;  then  he  would  stand  as  far  from  his  canvas  as 
he  was  from  the  sitter,  and  would  so  paint  it,  standing  still,  even 
if  he  had  to  use  sticks  six  feet  long  on  which  to  tie  his  brushes.  He 
worked  with  great  rapidity.  The  music  that  he  so  greatly  loved,  he 
wrought  by  the  alchemy  of  his  genius  into  terms  of  colour;  and  in  his 
employment  of  it  he  is  without  rival  in  his  own  realm.  He  painted 
his  portraits  throughout,  treating  the  draperies  as  an  essential  part  of 
the  harmony;  it  was  only  in  the  tedious  portraits  that  he  employed 
Gainsborough  Dupont.  He  infused  his  own  vitality  into  all  he  did — 
his  figures  pulse,  breathe  with  life. 

With  scant  care  for  the  literary  and  philosophic  discussions  of 
the  age,  he  boasted  that  his  sole  reading  had  been  in  the  Book  of 
Nature.  He  was  a  pure  impressionist  in  painting;  he  saw  the  pic¬ 
tured  thing  in  mass,  colour,  and  tone— not  in  line.  And  he  caught 
by  his  exquisite  handling  the  allure,  the  femininity  of  women  in 
their  portraits  with  a  genius  that  has  never  been  surpassed. 


7 


JOSEPH  MALLORD  WILLIAM  TURNER, 
(1775-1851) 

When  1800  struck,  the  British  genius  had  found  its  highest  utter¬ 
ance  in  the  realm  of  colour;  the  giant  of  that  realm  was  Joseph  Mal- 
lord  William  Turner. 

In  Turner  we  reach  the  supreme  artist  in  painting  of  our  race; 
in  the  realm  of  landscape  the  supreme  artist  of  all  time.  In  the 
poetic  employment  of  color,  in  the  wide  gamut  of  color  music,  in  the 
prodigious  power  of  the  orchestration  of  the  art  of  painting,  he 
stands  beyond  all  other  achievement  whatsoever,  as  in  the  art  of 
literature  Shakespeare  stands  above  all  other  achievement.  That 
Turner  should  have  reached  to  this  prodigious  achievement  in  the 
realm  of  landscape  is  the  more  extraordinary,  since  other  painters, 
as  mere  painters,  have  been  greater  craftsmen  than  he.  Velasquez 
and  Hals,  Rembrandt  and  Titian,  Watteau  and  Vermeer,  knew  no  such 
vast  adventure  in  the  realm  of  color.  One  is  more  subtle,  another 
more  tender,  another  more  absolute  in  his  craftsmanship;  but  their 
range  in  artistic  utterance  is  small  compared  with  the  eagle  flight  of 
Turner. 

Turner  was  given  a  long  life,  as  though  destiny  had  fitted  him 
for  its  chosen  mouthpiece  in  his  mighty  adventure  in  the  arts.  His 
art  went  rapidly  through  the  phases  of  the  earlier  developments  of 
artistic  utterance — burst  into  the  supreme  utterance  of  the  art  of  his 
own  age — and  launched  on  the  vast  uncharted  seas  of  the  future 
orchestration  of  color. 

In  a  mean  shop  at  26  Maiden  Lane,  long  since  pulled  down,  in 
the  Parish  of  St.  Pauls,  Covent  Garden,  there  lived  in  good  King 
George’s  days,  and  plied  his  calling  of  barber,  one  William  Turner, 
a  fellow  from  Devon — indeed,  at  South  Molton  still  lived  his  father 
and  mother.  To  this  Devonshire  barber  and  his  wife  was  born  April 
23,  1775  a  man-child  whom  they  christened  Joseph  Mallord  William 
Turner,  destined  to  bring  immortal  fame  to  that  Devonshire  stock  and 
to  the  England  that  bred  him,  (the  greatest  poet  in  color  that  the 
world  has  seen). 

At  nine  the  boy  Turner  drew  Margate  Church,  just  before  going 
to  his  uncle  at  New  Brentford  for  change  of  air  and  eventually  to 
school  there,  to  draw  cocks  and  hens  and  birds  and  flowers  on  wall 
and  book.  He  was  always  drawing.  He  would  copy  engravings, 
color  them,  and  the  thrifty  father  would  hang  them  in  his  window 
for  sale.  The  early  intention  of  making  the  boy  a  barber  soon  gave 
way  to  the  encouragement  of  the  arts. 

He  was  sent  to  Coleman’s  School  at  Margate  in  1788,  and  after¬ 
wards  to  Malton,  a  draughtsman  of  perspective  in  Long  Acre,  who 
sent  him  away  for  incapacity  to  understand  perspective!  Reynolds  is 
raid  to  have  taken  him  up;  and  in  1789  he  was  bound  to  the  architect 
Hardwick,  going  also  to  the  schools  of  the  Royal  Academy  early  in 
1790,  at  15,  working  for  two  years  at  the  antique.  He  was  making 
drawings  in  that  ill-lit  home  the  while  for  sale;  he  was  coloring 
prints  for  John  Raphael  Smith;  he  was  out  sketching  with  a  lad  of 
ms  own  age  called  Girtin;  and  the  evening  saw  him  drawing  at  the 
generous  Dr.  Monro’s,  besides  washing  in  backgrounds  for  the  archi- 

8 


tect  Mr.  Porden.  What  labor  for  a  boy!  Scant  wonder  that  scholar¬ 
ship  had  small  part  in  his  life.  But  at  least  he  was  learning  to  draw; 
for  that  he  was  trained  like  a  racehorse  for  the  race.  And  he  loved 
the  life.  With  his  boy  companion,  Girtin,  he  was  soon  the  finest 
“water-color  draughtsman”  in  the  land,  except  perhaps  Couzens. 

He  was  of  a  very  secretive  nature,  which  early  drove  him  to 
“keeping  himself  to  himself.”  He  was  soon  shunning  all  social 
intercourse,  the  very  companionship  even  of  his  fellow-artists.  In¬ 
deed  some  of  his  earl  water-color  drawings  in  their  exquisite  harmonies 
of  green  and  gray,  painted  at  sixteen,  are  so  astoundingly  original 
and  in  advance  of  all  landscapes  painted  before  him  that  his  craft  must 
have  been  marvelous  long  before  he  came  to  manhood.  In  isolation 
of  the  mind  and  of  the  body,  in  a  rude  ignorance,  ruthlessly  and 
without  flinching,  he  paid  the  price  of  immortality.  Dr.  Monro 
taught  him  water-color  drawing,  he  as  greedily  learnt  architecture 
from  Hardwick,  he  picked  up  something  of  oil  painting  from  Sir 
Joshua  Reynolds;  but  of  education,  as  we  mean  the  word,  he  had 
scarce  any.  With  feverish  eagerness  he  studied  and  copied  Claude 
and  Van  der  Velde,  Titian  and  Canaletto,  Cuyp  and  Wilson.  Above 
all  he  went  to  Nature.  He  would  see  a  picture  at  an  exhibition,  and 
go  straight  home  and  try  to  outclass  it.  His  sole  condition  was  soli¬ 
tude;  he  needed  that.  When  he  came  to  journey  for  subjects,  he 
would  carry  all  his  baggage  over  his  shoulder  on  a  stick.  Jotting, 
noting,  his  sensitive  brain  alive  to  every  vista.  His  prodigious 
memory  could  recall  cloud  shapes.  He  found  that  minute  methods 
were  slow;  he  promptly  employed  broad,  swift  handling. 

At  fourteen  then,  in  1789,  he  became  a  student  at  the  Royal 
Academy,  the  next  year  he  showed  his  view  of  the  Archbishop’s 
Palace  at  Lambeth.  His  sketch-books  of  1792  and  1793  are  of  Oxford, 
Windsor,  Hereford,  Worcester,  Wales  and  Monmouthshire.  In  1797 
was  his  first  known  displayed  oil  painting  “The  National  Gallery, 
Moonlight,  Milbank.”  The  Academy  elected  Turner  an  Associate  in 
1799.  He  stood  head  and  shoulders  above  all  rivals  at  24.  Wilson, 
a  mightier  genius,  he  strove  to  out-distance  for  many  a  year,  nor 
ceased  until  1822;  but  he  recognized  in  him  a  powerful  antagonist. 
In  1802  he  was  elected  a  Royal  Academician,  and  crossed  to  France 
where  a  new  world  was  opened  to  his  vision.  He  added  the  mystery 
of  the  sea  to  his  ever-widening  realm.  The  “Death  of  Nelson”  was  of 
1808.  In  1807  Turner  challenged  the  accepted  God  of  Landscape, 
Claude,  with  his  “Liber  Studiorum.”  He  now  put  his  own  vision 
against  the  more  limited  vision  of  Claude.  In  1809  Turner  began 
those  one-man  shows  of  his  work  in  his  house  in  Harley  Street,  which 
soon  became  known  as  “The  Turner  Gallery.”  He  was  becoming 
rapidly  rich  and  lived  very  quietly.  In  1819  Turner,  at  the  urging 
of  Lawrence  then  in  Rome,  pushed  on  for  the  first  visit  to  Italy;  he 
moved  eagerly  from  place  to  place,  Rome  and  the  rest,  his  sketch-books 
incessantly  busy.  To  the  Academy  of  1825  he  sent  only  the  “Dieppe.” 
Turner  is  now  50.  Money  poured  in — he  had  no  use  for  it.  His 
house  becomes  ever  more  squalid,  ever  more  dingy.  Turner  has  no 
eyes  but  for  his  art.  His  eternal  squabbles  with  his  publishers  be¬ 
come  ever  more  furious;  yet  he  shows  at  the  Academy  his  brilliant 
“Cologne.”  It  is  hung  between  two  portraits  by  Lawrence;  puts 
them  out — he  covers  his  “Cologne”  with  water-color  lampblack  to  give 
Lawrence’s  portraits  honor.  Then  he  makes  across  sea  to  the  Meuse, 
the  Moselle,  and  the  Rhine. 


9 


In  1827,  his  52nd  year,  Turner  began  to  pour  forth  his  splendor. 
The  serene  “Mortlake”  and  “Rembrandt’s  Daughter,”  in  which  he 
tries  a  fall  with  the  great  Dutchman,  are  of  this  time.  In  1828  he 
again  went  to  Italy. 

It  came  to  Turner  that  color  affects  the  senses  exactly  as  music 
does;  if  the  color  be  blithe  and  gay  it  arouses  blithe  and  gay  emo¬ 
tions — if  sombre  and  solemn,  it  arouses  sombre  and  solemn  emotions. 
And  the  day  he  discovered  this  vital  fact,  he  thrust  the  art  of  paint¬ 
ing  beyond  all  previous  achievement  into  the  modern  achievement. 
In  1833,  at  58,  Turner  painted  his  first  picture  of  Venice — Venice 
that  he  was  to  immortalize  in  masterpiece  after  masterpiece,  and 
state  in  wondrous  fashion,  haunted  by  all  the  wizardry  of  her  sea 
romance.  He  begins  by  challenging  and  overwhelming  Canaletto; 
soon  he  was  to  breathe  Venice  across  the  canvas,  aerial  as  splendid 
dreams. 

In  1835  Turner  was  60.  Many  an  artist  tied  to  a  narrow  gamut, 
has  exhausted  his  genius  upon  that  gamut  before  30,  and  is  in  decline. 
Turner,  of  wiry  frame,  amazing  virility,  and  nerved  like  steel,  is  to 

pour  forth  work  from  60,  which  has  a  blithe  feeling  and  freshness  of 

youth.  His  powers  enormously  increase ;  he  adds  territory  after  terri¬ 
tory  to  the  realm  of  art — vast  territories  such  as  aforetime  had  never 
even  been  explored. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  Press  now  began  to  attack 

Turner.  Blackwood  opened  the  ball  by  assailing  the  “Venice.”  The 

following  year,  1836,  this  attack  became  more  general  over  the  “Mer¬ 
cury”  and  “Argus.”  Ruskin  at  17  took  up  the  championship  of 

Turner,  which  the  old  man  grimly  let  go  by  him  with  his  “I  never 
move  in  these  matters.” 

In  1842,  at  67,  Turner  painted  several  of  the  masterpieces  of  his 
great  career.  The  magnificent  work  known  as  “The  Snowstorm,”  is 
a  masterly  statement  of  mist  and  light.  The  critics  of  all  kinds  were 
furious;  they  called  this  wondrous  thing,  this,  one  of  the  master¬ 
pieces  of  the  ages,  soapsuds  and  whitewash.  Turner  had  been  lashed 
to  a  mast  on  a  vessel  off  Harwick  in  a  hurricane  to  see  that  vision; 
he  had  made  the  sailors  take  him  out  to  see  it — a  man  of  67. 

Monro  of  Novar  offered  him  £25,000  for  all  he  had  at  Queen 
Anne  Street  Gallery,  but  Turner  answered  with  his  “No!  I  won't,  I 
can’t  .  .  .  besides,  I  can’t  be  bothered.  Good  evening.” 

In  1845  he  was  70.  We  have  Ruskin’s  witness  that  his  health 

began  to  fail,  yet  the  little  black  figure  squats  down  by  the  Thames 
mud  for  over  half  an  hour,  to  watch  how  the  water  ripples  to  the 
shore. 

On  the  death  of  Shee,  Turner  fretted  at  not  being  made  Presi¬ 
dent  of  the  Academy  and  he  left  his  usual  lodgings  and  no  one  knew 
where  he  had  gone,  but  was  found  by  his  old  servant  at  Chelsea  living 
in  a  cottage  with  a  Mrs.  Booth,  who  spoke  of  him  as  her  husband. 
Having  been  wheeled  to  the  window  to  look  upon  his  last  winter 
sunset,  he  died  in  her  arms  on  the  19th  of  December,  1851. 

The  urchins  of  Chelsea  had  called  the  eccentric  old  man  Admiral 
Booth — or  Puggy  Booth.  He  was  buried  in  St.  Paul's  Cathedral,  hard 
by  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds.  He  left  his  vast  treasure  of  art  to  the  Na¬ 
tion.  But  the  huge  sum  that  he  willed  for  a  home  for  poor  and  de¬ 
cayed  artists  of  lawful  English  birth  was  fought  over  in  Chancery, 
and  went  to  his  kin.  So  the  19,331  items  of  his  art  came  into  the 


IO 


Nation’s  keeping,  many  of  them  ruined,  most  in  a  filthy  state,  but 
all,  thanks  to  the  care  and  research  of  lovers  of  his  art,  now  emerg¬ 
ing  into  the  splendid  display  of  his  genius  in  the  National  Collections 
and  handsomely  housed. 

Mean  of  money,  he  was  artistically  generous.  A  young  fellow 
called  Bird  has  his  picture  crowded  out — Turner  takes  down  one  of 
his  own  and  sets  up  Bird’s  instead.  He  covers  his  luminous  “Cologne” 
with  lampblack  to  give  Lawrence’s  picture  honor — “it  will  all  wash 
off  after  the  exhibition.” 

So  the  little,  bowlegged,  snuffy,  big-headed  man,  with  the  small 
hands  and  feet  who,  when  sitting  perched  on  a  high  place,  could 
paint  masterpiece  after  masterpiece  in  the  four  days  allowed  for  var¬ 
nishing  at  the  annual  display,  who  gave  his  life  to  the  conquest  of 
light  and  color,  lives  immortal;  indeed,  did  not  Constable  affirm  that 
the  painting  of  Turner  was  the  most  complete  work  of  genius  known 
to  him.  It  is  but  the  dullard  pedant  who,  untouched  by  the  wizardry 
of  it  all,  peers  at  the  painted  canvas  and  picks  holes  in  details. 


II 


Catalogue 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

1.  Miss  Adney. 

Half  length ;  turned  half-way  to  the  right ;  nearly 
full  face,  eyes  directed  toward  the  spectator. 
She  wears  a  white  satin  gown  with  a  Pompa¬ 
dour  neck  and  pink  ribbons.  On  the  black  hair 
a  lace  cap  with  pink  bow.  Pearl  earrings. 
Brown  background.  Painted  oval. 

Painted  after  1763. 

Canvas  25  W.  x  30  H. 

Elizabeth  Adney  of  Walcot,  daughter  and  heir  of 
John  Adney  of  Bath,  born  about  1742,  mar¬ 
ried  Captain  John  Bragge  in  1762,  and  died 
1783. 

Gainsborough  painted  this  subject  twice,  the  first 
time  in  blue,  in  1762. 

Companion  picture  to  the  portrait  of  Captain 
John  Bragge. 

Mentioned  in  Mortimer  Menpes’  and  James 
Greig’s  “Gainsborough,”  London,  1909,  page 
169. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1906,  No. 

18. 

Collection  of  Mr.  Adney,  Bath. 

Collection  of  Sir  John  D.  Milburn,  Bart.,  late  of 
Guyzance,  Addington,  Northumberland. 


12 


GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

2.  James  Bouchier. 

Half  length  ;  turned  slightly  to  the  left ;  nearly 
full  face,  eyes  directed  toward  the  spectator. 
His  right  hand  in  his  waistcoat.  He  has  white 
stock  and  ruffles ;  under  left  arm  his  hat.  Pow¬ 
dered  hair.  Painted  oval. 

Canvas  25  W.  x  30  H. 

He  was  in  the  Indian  Civil  Service,  1 772. 

Previously  owned  by  a  member  of  the  family, 
England. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

3.  Captain  John  Bragge. 

Half  length ;  turned  half-way  to  the  left,  face 
and  eyes  in  the  same  direction.  His  right  hand 
in  his  waistcoat.  He  wears  a  green  coat  and 
waistcoat,  white  stock  with  laces  and  lace  ruf¬ 
fles  ;  under  left  arm  black  three-cornered  hat. 
Powdered  hair.  Brown  background.  Painted 
oval. 

Painted  during  the  artist’s  Bath  period,  (1760- 
1774),  about  1765. 

Canvas  25R5  W.  x  30^  H. 

Capt.  J.  Bragge  was  born  in  1741,  married  Eliza¬ 
beth  Adney  1762  at  Bath  Abbey,  and  died  1786. 

Companion  picture  to  the  portrait  of  Miss  Adney. 

Reproduced  in  “The  Art  Journal,”  December, 
1911,  No.  882,  page  425. 


13 


Mentioned  in  “The  Art  Journal,”  December, 
1 91 1,  No.  882,  page  424. 

Previously  owned  by  a  member  of  the  family, 
England. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

Geo.  Scott  Chad,  of  Thursford,  Norfolk. 

Half  length.  Seated,  turned  half-way  to  the 
right ;  face  and  eyes  in  the  same  direction. 
Hands  folded  in  front  of  him.  He  wears  a 
brown  coat,  white  stock  and  ruffles.  Powdered 
hair.  Landscape  background. 

Canvas  24J4  W.  x  29%  H. 

Companion  picture  to  the  portrait  of  Mrs.  Geo. 
Scott  Chad. 

Previously  owned  by  a  member  of  the  family. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

Mrs.  Geo.  Scott  Chad,  of  Thursford, 
Norfolk. 

Half  length.  Seated,  turned  half-way  to  the  left, 
face  and  eyes  in  the  same  direction.  Right 
hand  up  to  her  face.  Low  dress.  Hair  dressed 
high ;  a  tress  hanging  over  the  right  shoulder. 
Landscape  background. 

Canvas  24^  W.  x  29%  H. 

Companion  picture  to  the  portrait  of  Mr.  Geo. 
Scott  Chad. 

Previously  owned  by  a  member  of  the  family. 


6. 


GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

Lord  Darnley. 


Half  length ;  turned  half-way  to  the  left ;  eyes 
directed  toward  the  spectator.  He  wears  a 
plum-coloured  coat  and  white  stock.  Pow¬ 
dered  hair.  Painted  oval. 

Canvas  25  W.  x  30  H. 

John,  Fourth  Earl  of  Darnley,  son  of  John,  Third 
Earl  of  Darnley,  and  Mary,  daughter  and  heir 
of  John  Stoyte.  He  was  born  in  1767,  and  mar¬ 
ried  in  1791  Elizabeth,  third  daughter  of  the 
Right  Hon.  William  Brownlow  of  Lurgan,  by 
whom  he  had  four  children.  He  died  in  1831. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  194. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1877,  No. 
252. 

Exhibited  at  Grosvenor  Gallery,  London,  1885, 
No.  93. 

Previously  owned  by  a  member  of  the  family, 
England. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

7.  Lady  Anne  Duncombe. 

Full  length.  Standing  in  a  landscape,  turned 
slightly  to  the  right ;  face  turned  half-way  to 
the  left,  looking  over  her  right  shoulder.  Hands 
crossed  in  front  of  her ;  right  hand  holding  the 
hat  with  ostrich  feather.  Low-neck  blue  satin 


15 


dress  with  lace  trimming  and  ornamented  with 
pearls ;  white  skirt.  Hair  dressed  high,  a  tress 
hanging  over  her  left  shoulder.  On  the  left 
architectural  background. 

Painted  about  1774. 

Canvas  60  W.  x  9154  H. 

Lady  Buncombe  was  a  daughter  of  Anthony  Dun- 
combe,  created  1747  Lord  Feversham  ;  she  mar¬ 
ried,  1777,  Jacob,  Second  Earl  of  Radnor,  and 
died,  1829. 

Engraved  1872  by  J.  Scott  in  “Engravings  from 
the  works  of  Thomas  Gainsborough,’’  pub¬ 
lished  by  Henry  Graves  &  Co.,  London,  No. 
53  (here  wrongly  called  Hon.  P'rances  Dun- 
combe). 

Reproduced  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  opposite  page  44. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  PaSe  J94- 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1873,  No. 
120. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1907,  No. 
87- 

Exhibited  at  the  Exhibition  of  Old  English  Mas¬ 
ters,  Berlin,  1908,  No.  10. 

Collection  of  Lord  Lionel  Rothschild,  London. 

Collection  of  Charles  J.  Wertheimer,  Esq.,  London. 


16 


8. 


GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788,) 

Philip  Dupont. 


Half  length ;  turned  slightly  to  the  left.  Nearly 
full  face,  eyes  directed  toward  the  spectator. 
He  wears  a  claret-coloured  coat,  yellow  waist¬ 
coat  and  white  stock.  Painted  oval. 

Canvas  25  W.  x  30  H. 

Engraved  1875  by  R.  Josey,  in  “Engravings 
from  the  works  of  Thomas  Gainsborough,” 
published  by  Henry  Graves  &  Co.,  London,  No. 
57- 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  194. 

Collection  of  Louis  Huth,  Esq.,  of  Possingworth, 
Hawkhurst. 

Collection  of  M.  Kappel,  Berlin. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

9.  Lady  Eden. 

Half  length.  Seated,  turned  slightly  to  the  left, 
arms  crossed  on  a  book  in  front  of  her,  the  left 
resting  on  the  book ;  face  turned  slightly  to  the 
left,  eyes  directed  toward  the  spectator.  Lilac 
low-cut  dress  ornamented  with  pearls ;  scarf 
loosely  thrown  over  her.  Hair  powdered  and 
entwined  with  blue  ribbon,  turned  up ;  loose 
curls  fall  over  either  shoulder.  Dark  back¬ 
ground. 


1 7 


Painted  about  1770. 

Canvas  24  W.  x  29P2  H. 

Dorothea,  Lady  Eden,  was  a  daughter  of  Peter 
Johnson,  Esq.,  Recorder  of  York.  She  mar¬ 
ried  as  his  second  wife,  Sir.  John  Eden,  of 
Windlestone  Hall,  Durham. 

Engraved  1870  by  G.  H.  Every  in  “Engravings 
from  the  works  of  Thomas  Gainsborough,” 
published  by  Henry  Graves  &  Co.,  London, 
No.  58. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  194. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1878,  No. 
15.6.. 

Exhibited  at  Grosvenor  Gallery,  London,  1885. 
No.  1 14. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1887, 
No.  34. 

Collection  of  Mrs.  Eden  Kaye  Greville  (daugh¬ 
ter  of  Dorothea,  Lady  Eden). 

Collection  of  James  Price,  Esq. 

Collection  of  Sir  Julian  Goldsmid,  Bart. 

Collection  of  Mr.  Agnew,  London. 

Collection  of  Ch.  Wertheimer,  Esq.,  London. 


18 


10. 


GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

John  Gainsborough 
(“Scheming  Jack"). 

Canvas  20  W.  x  24  H. 

The  painter’s  brother. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  196;  mentioned  page  44,  as 
follows : 

“John,  commonly  known  about  his  native  town  as 
‘Scheming  Jack,’  was  the  eldest  of  the  family. 
He  really  seems,  like  his  younger  brother 
Humphry,  to  have  been  gifted  with  considerable 
genius  for  mechanics.  Unfortunately,  those 
who  have  recorded  his  achievements  appear  to 
have  been  quite  destitute  of  any  such  gift  them¬ 
selves,  and  so  it  is  difficult  to  understand  what 
‘Scheming  Jack’  really  did  invent.  He  seems, 
however,  to  have  hit  upon  the  principle  of  the 
turbine,  for  what  else  can  Thicknesse  mean  by 
a  ‘wheel  that  turned  in  a  still  bucket  of  water’? 
A  metal  turbine,  laid  on  the  water  in  a  bucket, 
would  turn  as  it  sank  to  the  bottom.  Unhap¬ 
pily,  like  so  many  other  inventors,  Jack  had 
been  denied  the  faculty  for  contriving  links  be¬ 
tween  invention  and  profits.  The  cradle  which 
rocked  itself  and  the  ‘cuckoo  which  sang  all  the 
year  round,’  were  toys,  but  the  turbine  offered 
possibilities  which  someone  about  him  ought  to 
have  recognized.  A  chronometer,  built  in  com¬ 
petition  for  the  Government  prize  of  £20,000, 
which  was  won  by  Harrison,  had  better  luck, 

19 


for,  though  unsuccessful  in  the  competition,  it 
was  awarded  a  sum  of  money  for  its  ingenuity.” 

Mentioned  in  Fulcher’s  “Life  of  Gainsborough,” 
London,  1856,  page  210,  as  belonging  to  W. 
Sharpe,  Esq.  Fulcher  also  gives  an  account  of 
John  Gainsborough,  pages  12-17. 

In  his  “Sketch  of  the  Life  and  Paintings  of 
Thomas  Gainsborough,”  (1788),  Philip  Thick- 
nesse  (Gainsborough’s  friend)  gives  an  inter¬ 
esting  description  of  a  visit  he  paid  “Scheming 
Jack”  about  the  year  1768. 

Purchased  from  the  family  by  W.  Sharpe  in  1841. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788J 

11.  David  Garrick. 

Half  length.  Seated,  turned  slightly  to  the  right ; 
nearly  full  face,  eyes  directed  toward  the  spec¬ 
tator.  His  right  arm  resting  on  the  back  of 
the  chair,  with  his  left  hand  he  is  making  a 
gesture.  He  wears  a  dark  coat,  white  stock 
with  laces  and  lace  ruffles.  Powdered  hair. 

Canvas  25  W.  x  30  H. 

David  Garrick  was  an  English  actor,  born  in 
Hereford,  Feb.  20,  1716,  and  died  in  London, 
Jan.  20,  1779.  His  grandfather  was  a  French 
Protestant  who  took  refuge  in  England  after 
revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes.  His  father 
was  a  Captain  in  the  English  Army,  and  main¬ 
tained  with  difficulty  a  family  of  seven  children. 

Reproduced  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  opposite  page  28. 

20 


12. 


Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  Pa&e  2&. 

Collection  of  J.  P.  Schomberg. 

Collection  of  D.  R.  Blaine. 

Collection  of  Mr.  Peel,  London. 


GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

The  Hon.  Mrs.  Graham. 

Half  length.  Standing,  turned  slightly  to  the 
right,  face  and  eyes  slightly  to  the  left.  Arms 
in  front  of  her,  one  above  the  other,  her  hand 
holding  up  her  dress.  Low-neck  lilac  dress. 
Hair  dressed  high  and  ornamented  with  pearls ; 
a  tress  hanging  over  her  right  shoulder.  Land¬ 
scape  background. 

Canvas  28  W.  x  36  H. 

Her  name  was  Mary,  the  daughter  of  the  Ninth 
Lord  Cathcart;  born  1757,  married  1774,  Sir 
Thomas  Graham,  of  Balgowan,  afterwards  Lord 
Lynedoch,  one  of  the  heroes  of  the  Peninsular 
War;  she  died,  1792. 

Supposed  to  be  the  study  for  the  portrait  in  the 
National  Gallery  at  Edinburgh.  Mr.  Claude 
says :  “One  of  the  most  brilliant  works  of 
Gainsborough’s  last  period,  superior  perhaps  in 
quality  to  the  celebrated  full  length  portrait  of 
the  same  subject  now  in  the  National  Gallery  of 
Scotland,”  Both  pictures  were  hidden  from 
1792  to  1884. 


21 


13- 


Engraved  1868  by  C.  Tomkins  in  “Engravings 
from  the  works  of  Thomas  Gainsborough,”  pub¬ 
lished  by  Henry  Graves  &  Co.,  London,  No.  70. 

Reproduced  in  Armand  Dayot’s  and  Claude  Phil¬ 
lips’  “Cent  Portraits  de  femmes,”  Paris,  1910, 
between  pages  4  and  5. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  196. 

Mentioned  in  Mortimer  Menpes’  and  James 
Greig’s  “Gainsborough,”  London,  1909,  page 
I74- 

Mentioned  in  Armand  Dayot’s  and  Claude  Phil¬ 
lips’  “Cent  Portraits  de  femmes,”  Paris,  1910, 
page  5. 

Exhibited  at  the  second  special  exhibition  of  Na¬ 
tional  Portraits,  South  Kensington  Museum, 
London,  1867,  page  106,  No.  463. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1907,  No. 
112. 

Exhibited  at  the  “Exposition  de  Cent  Portraits  de 
Femmes,”  Paris,  1909,  page  4,  No.  5. 

This  picture  was  bequeathed  by  Lord  Lyndoch  to 
his  nephew,  James  Maxton  Graham,  the  father 
of  the  recent  owner. 

Previously  owned  by  A.  G.  Maxtone-Graham,  of 
Cultoquhey,  Pertshire. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788J 

Viscount  Hampden. 

In  plum-coloured  coat  and  vest,  with  lace  cravat 
and  powdered  wig.  Painted  oval. 

Canvas  22*4  W.  x  27J4  H. 

22 


14- 


Robert  Trevor,  son  of  Thomas,  Baron  Trevor, 
and  of  Anne,  daughter  of  Robert  Weldon,  Esq., 
of  Brampton,  Huntingdon;  born  in  1701;  suc¬ 
ceeded  his  brother  as  Fourth  Baron  Trevor; 
created  Viscount  Hampden  of  Hampden,  Bucks, 
in  1776;  married  Constantia,  daughter  of  Peter 
de  Huybert,  Lord  of  Van  Kruningen,  Holland; 
died  in  1783.  He  was  Minister  at  The  Hague, 
1739-46. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  197. 

Collection  of  the  Earl  of  Hardwicke,  1888. 

Collection  of  James  Price,  Esq.,  1895. 

Collection  of  J.  Ruston,  Lincoln,  1913. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

Mrs.  Hatchett. 

Half  length..  Standing;  full  face,  eyes  directed 
toward  the  spectator.  Low-neck  yellowish 
dress.  Dark  hair  arranged  in  ringlets,  some  of 
which  are  falling  down  on  her  shoulders.  Land¬ 
scape  background,  on  the  left  a  spray  of  con¬ 
volvulus.  Painted  oval. 

Painted  in  1786. 

Canvas  24^2  W.  x  29^  H. 

Mrs.  Hatchett  was  the  wife  of  Charles  Hatchett, 
Esq.,  of  Mount  Clare,  Roehampton.  He  was 
descended  from  the  old  French  Noblesse  and  of 
a  Huguenot  family  like  his  wife.  The  family 
of  the  latter  disguised  itself  under  the  English 
surname  of  Collick,  but  the  real  name  was  lost. 


23 


This  portrait  was  painted  immediately  after  her 
marriage  when  the  lady  was  17  years  old  and 
presented  by  the  artist  in  its  present  frame. 

Reproduced  in  the  catalogue  of  the  Loan  Exhibi¬ 
tion  of  the  Coates  Collection  at  Lawrie  &  Co., 
London,  1893,  opposite  No.  24. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  197. 

Exhibited  at  the  Loan  Exhibition  of  the  Coates 
Collection  at  Lawrie  &  Co.,  London,  1893,  No. 
24- 

Collection  of  Alfred  Rothschild,  London. 

Collection  of  Charles  Wertheimer,  London. 

Collection  of  Archibald  Coates,  Paisley. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

15.  Mrs.  Horton,  Afterwards  Duchess  of 
Cumberland. 

Bust ;  low  white  dress,  transparent  veil. 

Painted  in  1770. 

Canvas  25  W.  x  30  H. 

Anne,  daughter  of  Simon  Luttrell,  who  was  cre¬ 
ated  Baron  Truham  in  1768,  Viscount  Car- 
hampton  in  1780,  and  Earl  of  Carhampton  in 
1785 ;  married,  in  1765,  Christopher  Horton,  of 
Catton  Hall,  Derbyshire,  who  died  in  1769;  in 
1771,  in  spite  of  the  strongest  opposition  of 
King  George  III,  she  married,  as  her  second 
husband,  his  brother,  Prince  Henry  Frederick, 
who  was  created  Duke  of  Cumberland;  she 
died  in  1803  (?  1809). 


24 


At  the  time  of  her  marriage  with  the  Prince  she 
was  “a  fascinating  widow  of  twenty-four.” 
Walpole  says,  “She  had  the  most  amorous  eyes 
in  the  world,  and  eyelashes  a  yard  long,”  “was 
coquette  beyond  measure,  artful  as  Cleopatra, 
and  completely  mistress  of  all  her  passions  and 
projects.” 

William  B.  Boulton,  in  his  “Gainsborough,”  pp. 
245-6,  says:  “The  Duke  and  Duchess  appeared 
to  be  very  partial  to  Gainsborough  as  a  por¬ 
trait  painter,  for  together  they  sat  as  many  as 
twelve  times  to  him.  The  Duchess  was  a  very 
prominent  figure  in  the  social  life  of  that  period. 
She  came  of  the  Luttrell  family,  who  were  well 
regarded  by  King  George  as  henchmen  of  the 
Court,  and  it  was  her  brother  the  Colonel  who 
represented  the  Court  interest  against  Wilkes 
in  the  dire  struggle  of  the  Middlesex  election. 
It  is  possible,  however,  that  the  King’s  favour 
declined  when  he  heard  from  Calais  that  his 
brother  had  married  the  lady  in  1771.  Accord¬ 
ing  to  Walpole,  this  lady  was  much  in  love  with 
her  first  husband,  Mr.  Horton,  whom  she  lost, 
with  their  infant  daughter,  within  a  fortnight. 
There  is  an  unusual  touch  of  tenderness  in 
Horace’s  mention  of  the  poor  lady’s  trouble, 
whom  he  describes  as  ‘covering  her  grief  for 
the  daughter  in  order  to  conceal  the  misfortune 
from  the  husband.’  For  the  rest,  his  descrip¬ 
tion  of  the  Duchess  is  a  helpful  commentary 
upon  Gainsborough’s  fine  canvas.  ‘She  was 
rather  pretty  than  handsome,’  he  says,  ‘and  had 
more  the  air  of  a  woman  of  pleasure  than  a 


25 


lady  of  quality,  though  she  was  well  made,  was 
graceful  and  unexceptionable  in  her  conduct 
and  behaviour.  But  there  was  something  in 
her  languishing  eyes  which  she  could  animate 
to  enchantment  if  she  pleased,  and  her  coquetry 
was  so  active  and  so  varied,  and  yet  so  habit¬ 
ual,  that  it  was  difficult  to  resist  it.  She  danced 
divinely,  and  had  a  great  deal  of  wit,  but  of 
the  satiric  kind ;  and  as  she  had  haughtiness 
before  her  rise,  no  wonder  she  claimed  all  the 
observances  due  to  her  rank  after  she  became 
Duchess  of  Cumberland.” 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  194.  Here  the  picture  is  stated 
to  have  been  painted  in  1766,  but  Sir  Armstrong 
told  Sir  Hugh  Lane  some  years  after  that  he 
thought  it  must  have  been  painted  in  1770. 

Exhibited  at  the  second  special  exhibition  of 
National  Portraits,  South  Kensington  Museum, 
London,  1867,  page  104,  No.  449. 

Collection  of  Lady  Wilmot  Horton,  in  whose  hus¬ 
band’s  family  it  had  remained  from  the  time 
it  was  painted. 

GAINSBOROUGH 
( 1 727-1 788 J 

Miss  Isabel  Howland. 

Half  length.  Seated,  turned  slightly  to  the  left ; 
nearly  full  face,  eyes  directed  toward  the  specta¬ 
tor.  Flower-figured  dress ;  black  velvet  neck¬ 
lace  with  pearl  ornaments,  pearl  earrings ;  on 
the  hair,  done  high,  a  cap.  Painted  oval. 

Canvas  25^  W.  x  30  H. 

26 


Engraved  1877,  by  J.  Scott  in  "Engravings  from 
the  works  of  Thomas  Gainsborough,”  published 
by  Henry  Graves  &  Co.,  London,  No.  78. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  "Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  198. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1877,  No. 
41. 

Exhibited  at  Grosvenor  Gallery,  London,  1885, 
No.  125. 

Previously  owned  by  Sir  George  Beafcmont,  Bart. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

17.  Portrait  of  Lady  Hylton. 

Half  length ;  full  face,  eyes  directed  slightly  to 
the  left.  Plum-coloured  dress,  white  fichu. 
Gray  powdered  hair,  loose  curls  falling  down  on 
her  shoulders.  Painted  oval. 

Canvas  25  W.  x  30  H. 

This  portrait  has  never  been  exhibited. 

Purchased  from  Lord  Hylton,  the  present  head  of 
the  Jolliffe  family. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

18.  Lady  Innes. 

Three-quarters  length.  Standing,  turned  half-way 
to  the  right,  also  the  face ;  eyes  directed  toward 
the  spectator.  In  her  left  hand  she  holds  a 
rose-bud,  right  arm  hanging  down  by  her  side, 
hand  holding  a  fold  of  her  robe.  Blue  taffeta 


27 


dress,  trimmed  with  lace ;  narrow  black  velvet 
band  round  her  throat,  and  small  white  plume 
in  her  hair.  Landscape  background  with  roses 
on  the  left. 

Canvas  28J6  W.  x  40  H. 

Probably  Sarah,  daughter  of  Thomas  Hodges  of 
Ipswich,  first  wife  of  Sir  William  Innes,  Eighth 
Bart. 

A  work  of  the  Ipswich  period,  hitherto  unrecorded 
in  works  on  Gainsborough. 

Exhibited  at  the  “English  Master’s”  Exhibition 
at  M.  Knoedler  &  Co.,  London,  1911,  No.  7. 

Innes  Collection,  1876. 

GAINSBOROUGH 
( 1 727- 1 788 ) 

Major  (Afterwards  General) 

Johnston,  of  Hawley's  Dragoons. 

Full  length ;  scarlet  coat,  green  breeches.  Lean¬ 
ing  against  a  tree  in  a  landscape. 

The  following  inscription  is  painted  on  the  pic¬ 
ture:  “Colol.  James  Johnston.  Married  the 
Lady  Henrietta  Cecilia  West,  daughter  of  John, 
First  Earl  of  De  Lawarr.” 

Canvas  60  W.  x  90  H. 

Mentioned  in  “Horace  Walpole’s  Letters”  (Cun¬ 
ningham),  pp.  24-5,  in  a  footnote:  “He  was  a 
great  favourite  with  the  fair  sex,  and  was  in¬ 
deed  so  handsome  and  fashionable  at  this  time 
that  Gainsborough  requested  him  as  a  great 
favour  to  sit  to  him  for  his  portrait  in  order  to 
bring  himself  into  vogue — which  he  did — and 

28 


20. 


after  the  picture  had  been  exhibited  a  consider¬ 
able  time,  the  artist  made  Major  Johnston  a 
present  of  it,  and  it  is  now  in  the  possession  of 
Sir  Alexander  Johnston.” 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  198. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788J 

Mrs.  King. 

Dark  hair,  blue  satin  dress,  lace  fichu,  pearls  in¬ 
terlacing  hair  and  dress. 

Painted  at  Bath  in  1770  (according  to 
Sir  Walter  Armstrong). 

Canvas  25  W.  x  30  H. 

Dorothea,  daughter  of  the  Rev.  Spence;  married 
in  Dublin,  in  1759,  Captain  James  King  (who 
died  in  November,  1771)  ;  died  at  Bath  in  1774, 
and  was  buried  in  the  church  at  Swords,  Co. 
Dublin.  She  was  a  sister  of  the  Rev.  William 
Spence,  sometime  Rector  of  St.  Stephen’s,  Dub¬ 
lin,  and  also  of  Whitehaven,  Cumberland. 

Purchased  from  the  family  in  1912. 


29 


GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

21.  Mrs.  Kinlock. 

Half  length;  full  face,  eyes  directed  toward  the 
spectator,  low-neck  yellow  dress.  Brown  hair, 
dressed  high.  Dress  and  hair  ornamented  with 
pearls.  Painted  oval. 

Canvas  25  W.  x  30  H. 

Mrs.  Isabella  Kinlock  was  wife  of  David  Kinlock, 
of  Gourdie. 

Loaned  to  the  National  Gallery,  Scotland. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  198. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

22.  Miss  Linley  and  Her  Brother. 

Half  length ;  Miss  Linley  in  low  dress,  turned  to 
the  right,  but  with  head  looking  out  at  specta¬ 
tor.  Her  brother,  in  red.  with  his  head  at  her 
shoulder. 

Painted  in  176S. 

Canvas  25  W.  x  27*4  H. 

Elizabeth  Ann  (Eliza),  elder  daughter  of  Thomas 
Linley,  the  musical  composer;  born,  1754;  sang 
with  her  sister,  afterwards  Mrs.  Tickell,  at  the 
concerts  established  by  her  father  at  Bath ;  mar¬ 
ried  privately  to  Richard  Brinsley  Sheridan,  the 
celebrated  dramatist  and  parliamentary  orator, 
in  1772,  at  Lisle,  whither  she  had  travelled  with 


30 


the  intention  of  entering  a  convent ;  an  accom¬ 
plished  singer  and  remarkable  for  her  beauty, 
she  retired  from  the  stage,  and  died  in  1792. 

Her  brother,  Thomas  Linley,  violinist  and  com¬ 
poser,  was  born  in  1756;  leader  of  the  orches¬ 
tra  and  solo-player  at  his  father’s  concerts  at 
Bath,  in  1773,  and  at  the  Drury  Lane  Oratorios, 
1774;  was  drowned  through  the  capsizing  of  a 
pleasure  boat  in  1778. 

Engraved  1868  by  G.  H.  Every  in  “Engrav¬ 
ings  from  the  works  of  Thomas  Gainsborough,” 
published  by  Henry  Graves  &  Co.,  London,  No. 
82. 

Reproduced  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,” 
London,  1899,  opposite  page  20. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  199. 

Mentioned  in  Mortimer  Menpes’  and  James 
Greig’s  “Gainsborough,”  London,  1909,  page  96. 

Exhibited  at  the  second  special  exhibition  of 
National  Portraits,  South  Kensington  Museum, 
London,  1867,  page  164,  No.  758,  by  the  Count¬ 
ess  Delawarr. 

Exhibited  at  New  Gallery. 

Exhibited  at  Grafton  Galleries  “Fair  Children” 
Exhibition,  London,  1895,  No.  127. 

Exhibited  at  Messrs.  Agnew’s,  London,  1913,  No. 

2. 

Collection  of  Lord  Sackville,  Knole  Park,  Seven- 
oaks. 


3i 


GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

23.  Edmund  Morton  Pleydell. 

Three-quarters  length.  Standing;  nearly  full 
face;  leaning  left  arm  on  back  of  Chippendale 
chair.  Plum-coloured  velvet  coat.  Open  win¬ 
dow  on  left.  Green  curtain  background  on  the 
right. 

Canvas  41  W.  x  50  H. 

Previously  owned  by  a  member  of  the  family, 
England. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

24.  Mrs.  Provis. 

Half  length ;  turned  slightly  to  the  right,  nearly 
full  face,  eyes  directed  toward  the  spectator. 
Yellow  low-neck  dress,  trimmed  with  gold  and 
yellow  beads ;  gray  scarf,  with  gold  fringe, 
hanging  over  her  left  shoulder.  Her  dark  hair 
done  high,  and  ornamented  with  a  string  of 
beads.  Painted  oval. 

Signed  and  dated  1766. 

Canvas  24  W.  x  29  H. 

Mrs.  Provis,  nee  Anne  Pigott,  wife  of  William 
Provis,  Esq.,  of  Shepton  Mellet  and  the  Cres¬ 
cent  Batto  was  one  of  the  most  celebrated  resi¬ 
dents  of  that  city  during  the  time  that  Gains¬ 
borough  lived  there. 

Previously  owned  by  a  lady,  England. 


32 


25- 


GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788; 

Mrs.  John  Taylor. 

Half  length  ;  turned  slightly  to  the  right ;  face  and 
eyes  directed  slightly  to  the  left.  Low-neck 
yellow  satin  dress  with  pearls  on  the  sleeves 
and  front  of  bodice.  Pale  blue  and  gold  sash 
around  her  waist.  Powdered  hair  with  trans¬ 
parent  gauze  veil  falling  over  right  shoulder. 
Painted  oval. 

Canvas  25  W.  x  30  H. 

Her  name  was  Sarah,  eldest  daughter  of  Samuel 
Skey,  of  Spring  Grove,  Worcester,  and  mar¬ 
ried,  1778,  John  Taylor,  of  Bordesley  Park  and 
Moseley  Hall,  Birmingham. 

Reproduced  in  the  illustrated  catalogue  of  a  Loan 
Collection  of  portraits,  Birmingham,  1903,  No. 
27- 

Reproduced  as  frontispiece  in  “The  Burlington 
Magazine,”  Vol.  Ill,  1903,  oposite  page  117. 

Exhibited  at  the  exhibition  of  a  Loan  Collection 
of  portraits,  Birmingham,  1903,  page  29,  No. 
27. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Gainsborough,”  Lon¬ 
don,  1899,  page  203. 

Mentioned  in  “The  Burlington  Magazine,”  Vol. 
Ill,  1903,  page  124. 

Collection  of  John  Taylor,  Esq.,  Birmingham. 

Collection  of  George  W.  Taylor,  Esq. 


33 


26. 


GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788,) 

Portrait  of  a  Gentleman. 


In  scarlet  coat,  light  blue  vest,  trimmed  with  sil¬ 
ver  braid,  white  stock  and  powdered  hair. 
Painted  oval. 

Canvas  24^  W.  x  29  H. 

GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788J 

27.  A  Pastoral  Landscape  With  Figures  and 
Cattle. 

In  the  foreground  a  pool,  on  the  far  side  of 
which  a  thick  forest  is  closing  the  whole  scen¬ 
ery,  under  the  trees  some  sheep  and  two  cows 
with  the  shepherd  boy.  To  the  left  a  boy  and 
a  girl  seated.  A  mountainous  background  is 
seen  on  the  left  between  the  trees. 

Canvas  59  W.  x  47  H. 

Mentioned  in  Mortimer  Menpes’  and  James 
Greig’s  “Gainsborough,”  London,  1909,  page 
176. 

Collection  of  Lord  Delawarr,  1857. 

Collection  of  Capt.  F.  H.  Huth,  England. 


34 


28. 


GAINSBOROUGH 

(1727-1788) 

A  Grand  Landscape. 


A  hilly  and  wooded  landscape.  From  the  distance 
flows  a  creek  to  the  foreground,  where  it  forms  a 
waterfall.  At  the  foot  of  the  fall  a  horseman  is 
watering  his  horse.  From  the  wooded  pass  at  the 
right  comes  a  flock  of  sheep.  In  the  middleground 
to  the  left  a  group  of  cows,  and  more  to  the  right  a 
woman  walking  towards  a  bridge.  In  the  distance 
are  visible  outlines  of  hills. 

Canvas  62^2  W.  x  SIVa  H. 

Collection  of  J.  Gillotte,  1872. 

Collection  of  Sir  Horatio  Davies,  M.P.,  Late  Lord 
Mayor  of  London. 


35 


29- 


TURNER 

(1775-1851) 

The  Pilot  Boat. 

Agitated  sea.  Man  in  boat  on  left  hails  with  his 
red  cap  the  nearest  of  two  smacks.  Beyond 
on  right,  man-of-war  at  anchor.  Low  coast 
lone  in  distance.  Burst  of  light  from  broken, 
stormy  sky  falls  on  greyish-green  sea  in  fore¬ 
ground  and  on  boat. 

Signed  “J.  M.  W.  Turner,  R.A.,”  and  painted  be¬ 
tween  1805  and  1810. 

Canvas  48  W.  x  36  H. 

Reproduced  in  Frederick  Wedmore’s  “Turner  and 
Ruskin,”  London,  1900,  Vol.  I,  opposite  page 
132. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Turner,”  London, 
1902,  page  230. 

Mentioned  in  A.  J.  Finberg’s  “Turner’s  Sketches 
and  drawings,”  London,  1910,  page  52,  as  fol¬ 
lows:  “Turner  has  summed  up  these  exper¬ 
iences  of  his  in  a  group  of  absolutely  unrivalled 
sea-pieces.  Pictures  like  Mr.  F.  H.  Fawke’s 
‘Pilot  hailing  a  Whitstable  Hoy,’  Mr.  G.  J. 
Gould’s  ‘The  Nore,’  Mr.  P.  A.  B.  Widener’s 
‘Meeting  of  the  Thames  and  Medway,’  and 
Lady  Wantage’s  ‘Sheerness,’  seem  to  me  be¬ 
yond  all  question  the  most  glorious  pictures  of 
the  sea  ever  painted.” 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1866,  No. 
156. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1906,  No. 
77- 

Collection  of  Fred  H.  Fawkes,  Esq.,  Farnley  Hall. 

36 


TURNER 

(1775-1851; 

Fishing  Boats  Entering  Calais  Harbour. 

In  the  middle  foreground  two  fishing  boats,  sail¬ 
ing  into  the  harbour  with  a  fresh  breeze,  the 
brown  sails  in  fine  form  against  the  dark  low¬ 
ering  clouds ;  seething  water,  well  lighted,  is  in 
the  wake  of  the  boats,  and  a  black  surging 
wave  rises  on  the  left.  Ships  and  buildings  in 
the  left  distance  beyond  the  pier;  to  the  right 
a  beacon. 

Canvas  38  W.  x  28  H. 

Engraved  by  Turner  himself  (W.  G.  Rawilson, 
“Turner’s  Liber  Studiorum,”  London,  1906, 
page  132,  No.  55). 

Reproduced  in  “The  Burlington  Magazine,”  Vol. 
XI,  1907,  page  399. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Turner,”  London, 
1902,  page  229. 

Mentioned  in  MacColl’s  “Nineteenth  Century 
Art,”  Glasgow,  1902,  page  190. 

Mentioned  by  C.  J.  Holmes,  in  “The  Burlington 
Magazine,”  Vol.  XI,  1907,  page  397. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1884,  No. 

53- 

Exhibited  at  Guild  Hall,  London,  1892,  No.  94. 

Exhibited  at  the  Loan  Exhibition  of  the  Coates 
Collection  at  Lawrie  &  Co.,  London,  1893,  No. 
28. 

Exhibited  in  the  International  Exhibition,  Glas¬ 
gow,  1901,  No.  80. 

Collection  of  Henry  Drake,  London. 

Collection  of  Archibald  Coates,  Paisley. 

37 


TURNER 

(1775-1851; 

The  Harbour  of  Dieppe. 


31- 


View,  looking  towards  the  town ;  the  harbour  is 
thronged  with  boats,  on  which  are  numerous 
figures ;  a  market  is  being  held  on  the  quay  on 
the  right ;  blue  sky,  with  clouds.  Warm  even¬ 
ing  light. 

Canvas  88J4  W.  x  68 *4  H. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Turner,”  London, 
1902,  page  221. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1825,  No. 

I5.2-. 

Exhibited  at  Messrs.  Agnew’s,  London,  1903. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1910,  No. 
1 12. 

Collection  of  James  Wadmore,  1854. 

Collection  of  John  Naylor,  Esq.,  Leighton  Hall. 

TURNER 

(1775-1851; 

32.  Cologne  :  Arrival  of  a  Packet  Boat,  Evening. 

Calm  rosy  twilight.  Slanting  rays  of  evening 
light  from  right,  over  the  walls  of  town.  Tow¬ 
er  of  St.  Martin  rises  above  them  in  centre.  In 
front  the  heavily  built  packet  boat  from  Diis- 
seldorf.  Above  the  distant  bridge,  to  left  the 
Siebengebirge,  and  the  church  of  Deutz  in  ex¬ 
treme  left. 


38 


Canvas  88 J4  W.  x  69  H. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Turner,”  London, 
1902,  page  220. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1826,  No. 

72-  . 

Exhibited  at  “The  Art  Treasures  of  the  United 
Kingdom”  Exhibition,  Manchester,  1857,  No. 
224. 

Collection  of  James  Wadmore,  1854. 

Collection  of  John  Naylor,  Esq.,  Leighton  Hall. 

TURNER 

(1775-1851; 

33.  Rembrandt's  Daughter  Reading  a  Love 

Letter. 

In  an  interior  a  white-dressed  girl  seated  on  the 
edge  of  a  bed,  with  her  left  arm  thrown  over 
the  back  of  a  crimson-damask  chair;  in  her 
right  she  holds  a  letter  which  she  is  reading. 
Entering  the  room  behind  the  chair  is  the 
painter,  with  a  palette  and  brushes  in  his  left 
hand ;  his  wife  follows  him.  In  the  background 
a  canvas  on  which  is  inscribed  “Rembrandt.” 
The  room  is  lighted  from  an  unseen  window  on 
the  left. 

Canvas  35^  W.  x  47^4  H. 

The  general  scheme  is  taken  from  Rembrandt’s 
“Pothiphar’s  Wife,”  in  the  Kaiser  Friedrich 
Museum  at  Berlin,  Catalogue  with  all  illustra¬ 
tions,  1911,  part  II,  page  187,  No.  828  H. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Turner,”  London, 
1902,  pages  57,  85,  1 19,  227. 


39 


34- 


Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1827,  No. 
166. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1877,  No. 
261. 

Collection  of  Ayscough  Fawkes,  Esq.,  Farnley 
Hall. 

Collection  F.  Hawkesworth  Fawkes,  Esq.,  Farn¬ 
ley  Hall. 


TURNER 

(1775-1851; 

The  Wreckers. 

The  high  coast  of  Northumberland  is  seen  in  the 
right  distance ;  in  the  middle  distance  Dunstan- 
borough  Castle.  A  steamboat  assisting  a  ship 
off  shore.  Numerous  figures  in  the  foreground 
dredging  wreckage  on  shore.  Stormy  sky  with 
gleams  of  sunshine. 

Painted  in  1834. 

Canvas  48  W.  x  36  H. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Turner,”  London, 
1902,  page  207. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1834,  No. 

i?9-. 

Exhibited  at  British  Institute,  London,  1836,  No. 

53- 

Exhibited  at  the  Royal  Jubilee  Exhibition,  Man¬ 
chester,  1887. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1891,  No. 
21. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1896,  No. 
128. 


40 


Collection  of  Elhanan  Bicknell,  Esq. 

Collection  of  Sir  John  Pender,  Bart.,  London. 
Collection  of  the  Duke  of  Northumberland, 
Warksworth  Castle. 


TURNER 

(1775-1851; 

35.  Venice. 

Looking  across  the  canal.  S.  Giorgio  and  the 
Dogano  to  right.  Shipping  with  bright  col¬ 
ored  right  and  left.  Brilliant  afternoon  light. 
Canvas  48  W.  x  36  H. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Turner,”  London, 
1902,  page  234. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1834,  No. 

T75- . 

Collection  of  H.  McConnell. 

Collection  of  John  Naylor,  Esq.,  Leighton  Hall. 


4i 


36- 


TURNER 

(1775-1851; 

The  Colliers. 


View  on  the  river  Tyne.  On  the  right  numerous 
vessels,  some  taking  in  coal  by  torchlight ;  on 
the  left  other  vessels  moored  along  the  shore ; 
full  moon  among  white  clouds  reflected  along 
the  centre  of  the  pale  green  water. 

Signed  “J.  M.  W.  T.” 

Canvas  48  W.  x  35^  H. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Turner,”  London, 
1902,  page  223. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1835,  No. 
24. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1887,  No. 
H- 

Collection  of  H.  McConnell,  Esq. 

Collection  of  John  Naylor,  Esq.,  Leighton  Hall. 

TURNER 

(1775-1851; 

37.  Pluto  Carrying  Off  Proserpine. 

View  of  a  mountainous  landscape  with  a  castle 
on  a  hill  in  the  middle  distance,  and  a  water¬ 
fall  on  the  left  of  it.  In  the  foreground  on  the 
left  Pluto  carrying  off  Proserpine ;  on  the  right 
a  tree.  Other  figures  on  the  left.  Warm  even¬ 
ing  sky.  The  artist  is  said  to  have  borrowed 
the  scenery  of  Sicily,  with  its  mountains  and 
water-falls  for  this  subject. 


42 


Painted  in  1839. 

Canvas  48^  W.  x  36^  H. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong's  “Turner,”  London, 
1902,  pages  12 1  and  227. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1839,  No. 

2,6°. 

Exhibited  at  Guild  Hall,  London,  1892,  No.  112. 

Exhibited  at  Royal  Academy,  London,  1896,  No. 
28. 

Exhibited  at  Guild  Hall,  London,  1899,  No.  35. 

Collection  of  Mr.  Wetherall. 

Collection  of  Edward  Chapman,  Esq.,  London. 

TURNER 

(1775-1851; 

38.  Italy:  Bridge  in  the  Middle  Distance. 

Wide  landscape  with  water  and  long  line  of 
arched  bridge,  divided  by  groups  of  tall  stone 
pines.  Figures  on  slope  in  foreground. 

Painted  between  1840  and  1845. 

Canvas  45^  W.  x  35 %  H. 

Very  similar  in  composition  to  the  well-known 
drawing  in  sepia  called  “Bridge  in  Mid-Dis¬ 
tance,  Sun  between  trees,”  bequeathed  by  Turn¬ 
er  to  the  National  Gallery;  this  was  engraved 
in  mezzotint  by  Charles  Turner  for  the  “Liber 
Studiorum,”  1808,  Plate  XIII. 

Mentioned  in  Armstrong’s  “Turner,”  London, 
1902,  page  223. 

Exhibited  at  Messrs.  Agnew’s,  London,  1913. 

John  Graham  Collection. 

Bicknell  Collection. 


cTWessrs.  M.  Knoedler*  &  Co. 
have  at  their  disposal  expert 
restorers. 

High  class  framing 


RESTORATION  OF  WORKS  OF  cART 
IS  A  MATTER  REQUIRING  THE 
GREATEST  DISCRETION.  We  METH¬ 
ODS  AND  SUITABILITY  OF  EACH 
RESTORER  VARYING  IN  RELATION 
TO  THE  WORK  OR  RASTER  RE¬ 
QUIRING  RESTORATION. 


